Background: The differential expression of oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) or Ki-67 between primary tumour and the recurrence has been described. We aimed to determine these changes and their prognostic implications. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 45 breast cancer patients with relapsed biopsy that were classified into local relapse (LR) or metastatic disease (MD) groups. We analyzed the conversion rate and the value of the immunophenotype of the primary tumour and the relapse as a prognostic factor for relapse-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: The conversion rate was 34.8% for Ki-67, 20% for ER, 20% for PR, and 15.6% for HER2. For the LR group, the RFS was 71.9 months and the OS was 141.6 months, without statistical differences according to the immunophenotype of the primary or the relapsed biopsy. For the MD group, the PFS was 20.8 months. According to immunophenotype of the relapse, the PFS were ER+ 24.7 months vs. ER– 9.3 months; PR+ 25.1 months vs. PR– 12.7 months without statistical differences according to HER2 or Ki67. The OS for MD group was 54.4 months without statistical differences according to immunophenotype. Conclusion: The characteristics of breast cancer can change over the time. Variations of the ER or PR status in MD group have prognostic value for PFS. To perform a biopsy of relapses is warranted in order to establish the prognostic of the current disease, and probably a more accurate treatment.

1.
Cardoso F, Costa A, Norton L, Senkus E, Aapro M, André F, et al.; European School of Oncology; European Society of Medical Oncology. ESO-ESMO 2nd international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC2).
Breast
. 2014 Oct;23(5):489–502.
2.
Carrasco E, Garrido JM, Álvarez PJ, Álvarez-Manzaneda E, Chahboun R, Messouri I, et al. Meroxest improves the prognosis of immunocompetent C57BL/6 mice with allografts of E0771 mouse breast tumor cells.
Arch Med Sci
. 2016 Oct;12(5):919–27.
3.
Guiu S, Michiels S, André F, Cortes J, Denkert C, Di Leo A, et al. Molecular subclasses of breast cancer: how do we define them? The IMPAKT 2012 Working Group Statement.
Ann Oncol
. 2012;23(12):2997–3006.
4.
Natrajan R, Weigelt B, Mackay A, Geyer FC, Grigoriadis A, Tan DS, et al. An integrative genomic and transcriptomic analysis reveals molecular pathways and networks regulated by copy number aberrations in basal-like, HER2 and luminal cancers.
Breast Cancer Res Treat
. 2010 Jun;121(3):575–89.
5.
Millikan RC, Newman B, Tse CK, Moorman PG, Conway K, Dressler LG, et al. Epidemiology of basal-like breast cancer.
Breast Cancer Res Treat
. 2008 May;109(1):123–39.
6.
Anderson WF, Rosenberg PS, Prat A, Perou CM, Sherman ME. How many etiological subtypes of breast cancer: two, three, four, or more?
J Natl Cancer Inst
. 2014 Aug;106(8):dju165.
7.
Prat A, Parker JS, Fan C, Cheang MC, Miller LD, Bergh J, et al. Concordance among gene expression-based predictors for ER-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant tamoxifen.
Ann Oncol
. 2012;23(11):2866–73.
8.
Prat A, Carey LA, Adamo B, Vidal M, Tabernero J, Cortés J, et al. Molecular features and survival outcomes of the intrinsic subtypes within HER2-positive breast cancer.
J Natl Cancer Inst
. 2014 Aug;106(8):dju152.
9.
Nielsen TO, Parker JS, Leung S, Voduc D, Ebbert M, Vickery T, et al. A comparison of PAM50 intrinsic subtyping with immunohistochemistry and clinical prognostic factors in tamoxifen-treated estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.
Clin Cancer Res
. 2010 Nov;16(21):5222–32.
10.
Prat A, Bianchini G, Thomas M, Belousov A, Cheang MC, Koehler A, et al. Research-based PAM50 subtype predictor identifies higher responses and improved survival outcomes in HER2-positive breast cancer in the NOAH study.
Clin Cancer Res
. 2014 Jan;20(2):511–21.
11.
Usary J, Zhao W, Darr D, Roberts PJ, Liu M, Balletta L, et al. Predicting drug responsiveness in human cancers using genetically engineered mice.
Clin Cancer Res
. 2013 Sep;19(17):4889–99.
12.
Carrasco E, Álvarez PJ, Prados J, Melguizo C, Rama AR, Aránega A, et al. Cancer stem cells and their implication in breast cancer.
Eur J Clin Invest
. 2014 Jul;44(7):678–87.
13.
Senkus E, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, Penault-Llorca F, Poortmans P, Rutgers E, et al.; ESMO Guidelines Committee. Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.
Ann Oncol
. 2015 Sep;26 Suppl 5:v8–30.
14.
de Dueñas EM, Hernández AL, Zotano AG, Carrión RM, López-Muñiz JI, Novoa SA, et al. Prospective evaluation of the conversion rate in the receptor status between primary breast cancer and metastasis: results from the GEICAM 2009-03 ConvertHER study.
Breast Cancer Res Treat
. 2014 Feb;143(3):507–15.
15.
Rossi S, Basso M, Strippoli A, Dadduzio V, Cerchiaro E, Barile R, et al. Hormone Receptor Status and HER2 Expression in primary breast cancer compared with synchronous axillary metastases or recurrent metastatic disease.
Clin Breast Cancer
. 2015 Oct;15(5):307–12.
16.
Thompson AM, Jordan LB, Quinlan P, Anderson E, Skene A, Dewar JA, et al.; Breast Recurrence in Tissues Study Group. Prospective comparison of switches in biomarker status between primary and recurrent breast cancer: the Breast Recurrence In Tissues Study (BRITS).
Breast Cancer Res
. 2010;12(6):R92.
17.
van de Ven S, Smit VT, Dekker TJ, Nortier JW, Kroep JR. Discordances in ER, PR and HER2 receptors after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer.
Cancer Treat Rev
. 2011 Oct;37(6):422–30.
18.
Zhou X, Zhang J, Yun H, Shi R, Wang Y, Wang W, et al. Alterations of biomarker profiles after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: tumor heterogeneity should be taken into consideration.
Oncotarget
. 2015 Nov;6(34):36894–902.
19.
Falato C, Lorent J, Tani E, Karlsson E, Wright PK, Bergh J, et al. Ki67 measured in metastatic tissue and prognosis in patients with advanced breast cancer.
Breast Cancer Res Treat
. 2014 Sep;147(2):407–14.
20.
Tökés AM, Szász AM, Geszti F, Lukács LV, Kenessey I, Turányi E, et al. Expression of proliferation markers Ki67, cyclin A, geminin and aurora-kinase A in primary breast carcinomas and corresponding distant metastases.
J Clin Pathol
. 2015 Apr;68(4):274–82.
21.
Yerushalmi R, Woods R, Ravdin PM, Hayes MM, Gelmon KA. Ki67 in breast cancer: prognostic and predictive potential.
Lancet Oncol
. 2010 Feb;11(2):174–83.
22.
Cardoso F, Harbeck N, Fallowfield L, Kyriakides S, Senkus E; ESMO Guidelines Working Group. Locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.
Ann Oncol
. 2012 Oct;23 Suppl 7:vii11–9.
23.
Chung YC, Wei WC, Hung CN, Kuo JF, Hsu CP, Chang KJ, et al. Rab11 collaborates E-cadherin to promote collective cell migration and indicates a poor prognosis in colorectal carcinoma.
Eur J Clin Invest
. 2016 Dec;46(12):1002–11.
24.
Li X, Zhang M, Liu J, Huang Z, Zhao Q, Huang Y, et al. Intrahepatic NK cells function suppressed in advanced liver fibrosis.
Eur J Clin Invest
. 2016 Oct;46(10):864–72.
25.
Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A’Hern R, Bartlett J, Coombes RC, Cuzick J, et al.; International Ki-67 in Breast Cancer Working Group. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group.
J Natl Cancer Inst
. 2011 Nov;103(22):1656–64.
26.
Fabi A, Di Benedetto A, Metro G, Perracchio L, Nisticò C, Di Filippo F, et al. HER2 protein and gene variation between primary and metastatic breast cancer: significance and impact on patient care.
Clin Cancer Res
. 2011 Apr;17(7):2055–64.
27.
Nishimura R, Osako T, Okumura Y, Tashima R, Toyozumi Y, Arima N. Changes in the ER, PgR, HER2, p53 and Ki-67 biological markers between primary and recurrent breast cancer: discordance rates and prognosis.
World J Surg Oncol
. 2011 Oct;9(1):131.
28.
Yeung C, Hilton J, Clemons M, Mazzarello S, Hutton B, Haggar F, et al. Estrogen, progesterone, and HER2/neu receptor discordance between primary and metastatic breast tumours-a review.
Cancer Metastasis Rev
. 2016 Sep;35(3):427–37.
29.
Cejalvo JM, Martínez de Dueñas E, Galván P, García-Recio S, Burgués Gasión O, Paré L, et al. Intrinsic subtypes and gene expression profiles in primary and metastatic breast cancer.
Cancer Res
. 2017 May;77(9):2213–21.
30.
Priedigkeit N, Hartmaier RJ, Chen Y, Vareslija D, Basudan A, Watters RJ, et al. Intrinsic Subtype Switching and Acquired ERBB2/HER2 Amplifications and mutations in breast cancer brain metastases.
JAMA Oncol
. 2017 May;3(5):666–71.
31.
Ding L, Ellis MJ, Li S, Larson DE, Chen K, Wallis JW, et al. Genome remodelling in a basal-like breast cancer metastasis and xenograft.
Nature
. 2010 Apr;464(7291):999–1005.
32.
Meric-Bernstam F, Frampton GM, Ferrer-Lozano J, Yelensky R, Pérez-Fidalgo JA, Wang Y, et al. Concordance of genomic alterations between primary and recurrent breast cancer.
Mol Cancer Ther
. 2014 May;13(5):1382–9.
33.
Nishimura R, Osako T, Nishiyama Y, Tashima R, Nakano M, Fujisue M, et al. Prognostic significance of Ki-67 index value at the primary breast tumor in recurrent breast cancer.
Mol Clin Oncol
. 2014 Nov;2(6):1062–8.
34.
Nakano M, Fujisue M, Tashima R, Okumura Y, Nishiyama Y, Ohsako T, et al. Survival time according to the year of recurrence and subtype in recurrent breast cancer.
Breast
. 2015 Oct;24(5):588–93.
35.
Prat A, Cheang MC, Martín M, Parker JS, Carrasco E, Caballero R, et al. Prognostic significance of progesterone receptor-positive tumor cells within immunohistochemically defined luminal A breast cancer.
J Clin Oncol
. 2013 Jan;31(2):203–9.
36.
Falato C, Tobin NP, Lorent J, Lindström LS, Bergh J, Foukakis T. Intrinsic subtypes and genomic signatures of primary breast cancer and prognosis after systemic relapse.
Mol Oncol
. 2016 Apr;10(4):517–25.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.